The Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM lens is renowned for its image sharpness and beautiful bokeh. However according to their tests, the newly designed Zeiss 135 seems to outperform the Canon, especially at wider apertures.Full Review

Lensrentals also posted a brief comparison between the two 135mm lenses here.

B&H Photo has just received the Zeiss 135mm f/2 Apo Sonnar T* ZE Lens for Canon in limited quantities.

This korean site has been on top of its game this last week - second review of a newly announced/released lens that I have seen up there before anywhere else. I actually think the incomprehensible language (I don't know a lick of korean) helps me analyze the results without bias.

Looks like a bloody sharp and contrasty lens for those who like the 135 FL.

The 135mm focal length, for me, would be something that I'd buy to photograph people. Not flowers, not landscapes; people. For me, auto focus is necessary for photographing people, so I'd never consider the Zeiss no matter how good it is.

If I were to switch to Sony, it'd be right at the top of the list of lenses to buy!

Edit: sorry, I originally wrote "manual focus is necessary for photographing people." That, I'm afraid, was a bit of a Freudian slip.

bcguy wrote:
The 135mm focal length, for me, would be something that I'd buy to photograph people. Not flowers, not landscapes; people. For me, manual focus is necessary for photographing people, so I'd never consider the Zeiss no matter how good it is.

If I were to switch to Sony, it'd be right at the top of the list of lenses to buy!

I've often tried focusing my 50 f/1.4, even at smaller apertures like f/2.8, and failed miserably (through the viewfinder). The DOF is far too shallow to be accurate. I've obviously had more luck using the live view, but obviously that requires a tripod and a static subject. What's your secret?

PS, I don't understand your comment about not considering the Zeiss...it is MF.....

splathrop wrote:
I'm a huge fan of Zeiss lenses, but this is going to be a hard lens to use wide open, except off a tripod, using live view. The Canon 135L is great people lens. This one, maybe not so much.

I have a lot of Zeiss ZE lenses with Canon mount. And I would not belive it's harder to use this lens than all the other fast lenses. Like the ZE 35/1,4 , 50/1,4 or 85/1,4 as a few examples. Yes it's longer than those other lenses. But it's also f/2 instead of f/1,4.
The Canon 135/2 is not that difficult to use with MF. And the Zeiss ZE will be much more easy with it's very long focus throw

Lars Johnsson wrote:
I have a lot of Zeiss ZE lenses with Canon mount. And I would not belive it's harder to use this lens than all the other fast lenses. Like the ZE 35/1,4 , 50/1,4 or 85/1,4 as a few examples. Yes it's longer than those other lenses. But it's also f/2 instead of f/1,4.
The Canon 135/2 is not that difficult to use with MF. And the Zeiss ZE will be much more easy with it's very long focus throw

A 135/2 has less DoF than any of those other lenses you mentioned despite having a smaller max aperture. Remember that focal length plays a factor in DoF along with both aperture and subject distance.

leftnose wrote:
A 135/2 has less DoF than any of those other lenses you mentioned despite having a smaller max aperture. Remember that focal length plays a factor in DoF along with both aperture and subject distance.

There is a lot of other things (not only the DOF) that will come into play when comparing how difficult MF is with different lenses. The other lenses also have a closer MFD that will make the DOF thin.
I would expect a lens like the ZE 35/1,4 to be much more difficult to MF wide open than the 135/2. With it's abberations when shooting at f/1,4
This is from diglloyd Lloyd Chambers review of the Zeiss 135/2 lens:

"I was concerned that focus accuracy would be an issue, but right off the bat I was delighted with the 135/2 APO-Sonnaró while the 100/2 Makro-Planar has given me fits focusing manually on my Nikon bodies (and I am not alone in that regard), I found that the APO Sonnar presented no difficulty at all, leaving only the inherent challenges of shooting a slightly moving person handheld at close range (photographer and subject movement together where only a few millimeters of movement with either cause blur).

The 135/2 APO offers stunning contrast wide open, and this is plain to see when focusing both by eye and with Live View. Totally absent from the 135/2 APO is the veiling purplish É/2 haze of the 100mm f/2 Makro-Planar, which for the 100/2 introduces an ambiguity in accuracy no matter how focus is done (by eye or with Live View). With the 135/2 APO-Sonnar, the image is crystal clear wide open at É/2."